390 A Mixed Methods Review of Endpoint Measures Utilized in Adult ADHD Medication Clinical Trial Design

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To evaluate the clinical trial designs of stimulant medications approved for the treatment of adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and identify discrepancies between safety and efficacy outcome measure criteria. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: There are 24 stimulants currently approved and marketed for the treatment of adult ADHD: 12 amphetamine (AMP)-based and 12 methylphenidate (MPH)-based formulations. A mixed methods review of clinical trials that have evaluated the safety and efficacy of these drugs will be performed using qualitative and quantitative data, including inclusion and exclusion criteria, primary and secondary outcome measures, manufacturer recommendations, and package inserts, as well as FDA recommendations for industry. After compiling a list of clinical trials for each of the 24 drugs, this information will be analyzed for themes and trends in the assessment of safety and efficacy with particular attention paid to differing criteria between individual drugs and/or the two subclasses of prescription stimulants. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The FDA has published recommendations for ADHD medication clinical trial design, including suggested outcome measures utilizing validated assessment tools. However, the FDA notes that these assessments may be altered to fit study populations and indicate that other primary and secondary endpoint measures may be acceptable. As such, efficacy assessments for these drugs may vary greatly, and the specific criterion selected for each drug’s study population and outcome measures may suggest more specific indications and usage conditions for optimal efficacy. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Regulatory officials consider AMP- and MPH-based stimulants equivalent therapeutic options for the treatment of ADHD. A study of clinical trial criteria reveals that differing mechanisms have been used to evaluate safety and efficacy. This discrepancy may have implications that affect clinical decision-making and patient experiences.